VIP

CNN Anchor Backs Leftist Mobs Going to Homes of Supreme Court Justices

|
|
Posted: May 09, 2022 6:45 PM
CNN Anchor Backs Leftist Mobs Going to Homes of Supreme Court Justices

Source: AP Photo/Ron Harris

CNN morning anchor Laura Jarrett justified far-left protesters showing up at the homes of Supreme Court justices to pressure them to not overturn Roe v. Wade in response to a draft opinion being leaked to the media.

Over the weekend, pro-abortion protesters showed up outside the homes of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, with more protests expected at other justices' homes in the coming weeks.

"This is a question about civility, the frustration people feel is personal, but where is the line? Obviously, we see the apparent arson at an anti-abortion nonprofit in Wisconsin is over the line. Violence is always over the line. But the real questions and conversations today about protests outside Supreme Court justices' houses, particularly Justice Kavanaugh. Where do you think that line is?" CNN's John Avlon asked. 

"I think for a lot of people, a conversation about civility feels like it misses the mark when constitutional rights that you believe that you had for over 50 years are about to be overturned. The justices have security. So far, all of the protests seem overwhelmingly nonviolent. There are plenty of protests that happen every single day in this country, around the country at abortion clinics, blocking women from getting into clinics and we don't cover those as if there's four-alarm fires," said Jarrett. 

"And so, yes, there are going to be protests in front of Kavanaugh's house because people are angry. And as long as they stay nonviolent, I think for most — for most of the people who are watching it, you can understand where they're coming from," she continued. "Even if you may think politically it’s not the right thing, you can understand sort of where that animated feeling is coming from." 

Josh Chafetz, a Georgetown University law professor, similarly tweeted, "The 'protest at the Supreme Court, not at the justices' houses' line would be more persuasive if the Court hadn't this week erected fencing to prevent protesters from coming anywhere near it." Adding, "And before the 'oh so you support J6 lmao!' trolls show up: the difference is *substantive*. When mobs is right, some (but not all!) more aggressive tactics are justified. When not, not."